Tick

If the setting would be appropriate for them, I'd love to have them back. But I wouldn't want to sacrifice exploring a cool new culture or space just for the ships.

Oh weird! So the chance to hit is subtracted by the armor class? That seems so backward to my brain. Thank you for explanation!

Maybe like others have postulated, they are a success despite the ruleset? I mean, just uttering the word THAC0 seems to confuse people who are unfamiliar with the older systems. Actually, I haven't played the EE's, do they even still use THAC0? What is THAC0?

Going off the no-name scheme just mentioned, you could always call yourself The Nameless One. Unfortunately we haven't seen a lot of their language and I don't know what the inspiration for the language is, but Parasol gave good advice I think.

I have a hard time communicating and explaining my ideas and grievances on this general topic, but I'm going to try because I think it's important. I get what you're saying, and I partially agree! But I'm hesitant to lump making a convincing argument / partially behaving in a certain way for an end result and, again, using people as a tool. Even if the behavior is similar (or the same). Calling someone "manipulative" isn't a flattering comment, and not something I would call Picard. Additionally, I find it disconcerting to put the two in the same category when I also see people acting so cavalier about damaging and (negatively) manipulative behavior. E.g. The way people act about Kevin Spacey's character in House of Cards. I know there's not really a better word or words to distinguish them, but it bugs me. It's not just what it's used for, it's how it's done. If a person did something that ended in a good result, but did it by using other people as tools, without respect for them as people, without caring about what they want or feel, without interest to the impact it had on them, I would argue that they did the wrong thing at worst and the right thing through an unethical choice or means at best. Someone trying and succeeding to convince you to change your opinion or do something, or someone partially changing their behavior to get along with you or change your mind, is not the same as someone knowingly pressing your buttons to get you to do what they want. Atsura being unable to read social cues and trying his best to get along by acting how he thinks he's supposed to is not the same as Atsura knowing how you feel and think and twisting that to get you to do what he wants. And, if Atsura is actually anti-social ("an intelligent/manipulative psychopath") and unable to empathize, that means he would probably be completely comfortable emotionally abusing, hurting, or killing people for his own interests. That would not necessarily be the case for the first possibility. I'm not saying all manipulation is bad, as we're using the term here, but there is a difference in the type of manipulation. And it's not just the result the person manipulating is going for.

I guess I could see how that would happen? That still seems like a stretch, and like it requires the Watcher to stick around and commit a lot of time and effort and resources, and I got the vibe that isn't the route the story is supposed to go. That said, I get why it bugs you that your Watcher can't do what you think they should, and I wouldn't mind if there were non-cannon endings, so long as it was somehow clear that not all are non-cannon. One could argue that the only thing worse than the balance of power in the Deadfire would be upsetting the balance of power in the Deadfire. I'm generally inclined to think that "super murderer uses murder superpowers to unilaterally decide the fate of the region" is an unhealthy solution to complex political issues. Very good point! I think that's a totally valid perspective, and that general issue is brought up a good amount in-game.

Oh good point! I had completely forgotten about that. I agree, though I think it's possible to go either way. He's willing to sacrifice kith lives for what he thinks is a net positive.

I've been thinking about the godlikes we haven't seen - especially after the spoiler image from one of the earlier threads - and I realized that I'm not sure if there would be Eothas godlikes or not. I assume there would not be while he was dead in the first game, and I assume there would not be after the end of the second. Would there be godlikes born during his giant pilgrimage, or before his death in the war? Is there any reference to them existing? I ask because it was later revealed that the godlikes have a secondary or primary function to be tools for the gods, at the godlikes' expense. I'm not sure if Eothas would find that acceptable or not, based on his behavior in various in-game books and in-game interactions with the Watcher.

Does one preclude the other? The Watcher is a mighty asset for any faction and Atsura has a vested interest in keeping them on the RDC's side. Being amiable and dealing with the Watcher as kindred minds is something that's natural. For the record, I never found Atsura to be particularly slimy. He's a strategist and a diplomat with an immense talent for dealing with people. It feels strange only because we can play a variety of characters and witness the different responses. Plus, consider the option that he's simply doing to you what you are doing to other NPCs: Choosing the option that has the highest chance of achieving the desired outcome. I like the notion that a few of the characters you meet might very well have been protagonists in their own games (hypothetical). Eg. Ulysses in FNV, Atsura in PoE2, the throng of adventurers in PoE1... Makes the world feel more alive than just having you be the mover and shaker. I like the protagonist feel of the characters too! And that's a fair point. I think it somewhat depends on perspectives. E.g. I know people that pretty much think all forms of behavior that are adjusted or tailored to the person one is interacting with is manipulative. I wouldn't agree with that (not saying that is or isn't how you feel). Manipulating someone and wanting to get along with them (including wanting to get along with them because you want something from them) don't necessarily have to be exclusive, but as someone that has had to deal a little with actively/abusively manipulative people, I think the difference matters. There's being diplomatic/sociable/acting in a certain way for a certain end goal, and there's treating people like a tool and doing whatever you need to to get what you want. You could argue the first one is manipulative, but I would say how truly manipulative it is depends on what the person's intent is and how much they care about their impact on their other person. As the Watcher, yes, I try to say things in a way that would convince someone to think about something in a certain way or do something, but I usually do it in a way where I still consider and respect them as a person. I'm not saying whatever it takes to get them to do what I want. I can't imagine ever saying something undermining to Aloth to get him to act how I want, and I can't imagine telling the Onekaza, "Hey, Castol wants to kill you" because I want to get rid of Castol. Extreme examples, but I can't think of more nuanced ones since I should be getting ready for work right now.

Thank you for the clarification! That line mystified me, so I guess my brain blocked it out. The third could be Eothas. His whole story in the first game was him dying. But I don't remember Waidwen being gargantuan so I'm not sure why Eothas dying would make the skeleton disappear. Edit : Unless he gave up whatever that form as a sacrifice to achieve something or because he thought it was unethical somehow.

The independent option in this game, because of the amount of control you have /don't have in this situation, is pretty much either the "I don't care what happens to the other people" option or the "I'd rather do this on my own than fall to doing something slimy /unethical for another power." On the second one that means even if it causes everyone to have to deal with the issues on their own. So it makes sense that you can't take over Ukaizo. You don't have the resources or time, and it thematically doesn't really fit. You can't just win or take over everything by being a one man army in this game.

If you're a priest of wael or did something extra nice for him last game, maybe it doesn't penalize you. Another possibility is Wael is the default when you don't have a crew member that the game deems worth killing off.

That's a really good way to put it! Really hits the nail on the head of the vibe he gives off. I think you made a pretty good analysis of him after too. And yeah, it's extremely hard to tell if he's being manipulative or just trying to socialize, engage, and relate to you. That may be the point. Either way, it's clear he doesn't think the same way and isn't quite in the same headspace you are. I just wanted to make a side comment and thank you for sharing that experience! I don't think I've had that experience or those obstacles myself, but I really want to understand better, so reading or listening about it from someone that knows more than me is really cool and helps.

Ah man, that's frustrating as hell. Sorry that happened. I never finished it, but I accidentally helped one of the cases, and the ending slides fit that scenario. I'm somehow not surprised that actually doing it the right way is the one that's bugged.

Wait, when was this brought up/referenced? I completed the game, but I'm completely lost here.

I think there's a solid argument to go either way (sorry, I know that's not super helpful). The game has already been fixed up quite a bit, but I'm sure it still has issues,and waiting for the rest of the bugs/awkward mechanics to be ironed out or content to be added is a fair decision. As for imported save or no, if you consistently went in a certain direction, the preset options are decent I think. I couldn't tell you if the history maker is still broken.

Yeah, there were a lot of companion bugs. I think I was lucky and didn't have it as bad as some, but I think I might have missed out on the companion -> companion interactions a lot. Glad to hear it was partially or fully fixed!

Interesting theory! I could definitely see that happening, based on the details you gave. Though I would be a little surprised that they would bring back a character from Chris Avellone without his writing involved.

Yeah! Exactly! It's much more realistic and believable, and it doesn't force the characters to warp their interests around the player. I completely forgot there was a line for Pallegina, but yeah, it came off as extremely inappropriate (I never saw what happens after). She's very obviously not comfortable with that kind of stuff, and she's being open and vulnerable about something extremely personal at that point. And yes, Tekehu's romance is a weird set-up haha. It ends up being really important and personal to him though. Ha! I had that feeling about the Maia quest and really liked the way it played the player before, but if yours is the post I'm thinking of, it crystallized a lot of my viewpoints on it. Put into words why the quest was so cool very well and brought up a couple things I hadn't thought of. Exactly! It very much does. Aloth and Eothas and the Watcher all play into the theme. It's just kind of awkwardly placed in what feels like random parts of the game. But it's for sure there. And when it's there, it's really maturely done I think. Thank you! I think it's a very cool touch to the game and brings a really complicated feeling/issue up to the forefront. It's actually an issue that I've sort of pondered on and off about throughout the past few years. And that's very true. It's why Obsidian is one of my favorite developers. They don't always make perfect or complete games (e.g. KOTOR 2), but the content they do make is nuanced and human and realistic, and yet knows the tropes of its genre(s) extremely well. You made some fantastic examples, I didn't know/remember a couple of them even, ha. Yes! The factions were amazing this game. I loved the ones in Fallout: New Vegas, but I appreciate how muddy the issues were in Deadfire.

If you don't complete the objective the assassinations don't happen. But then the quest isn't completed. I believe you need to pass a diplomacy skill check that persuades /goads her to take it by talking about her duty to the RDC. It *is * possible to make her just take it without handling the stalker. Thanks for the answer. I managed to convince her, it was the dialogue line about self sacrifice (diplomacy and something else I forget what). I was choosing the wrong options. The other guy was easy enough to deal with, and I got the dialogue from the guy at Brass Citadel about how Harama died and Tuaha had to leave sooner than expected. So it should be ok, as long as the ending slides aren't still bugged. Now I only have to decide if it's worth going through the rest of the game and be really frustrated at end if it turns out it's bugged, or just kill Maia and be done with it. Or not touch the quest. Yeah! You should be good. I don't think you can stop Maia from her objective. I don't know if it matters for the end slides though?

If you don't complete the objective the assassinations don't happen. But then the quest isn't completed. I believe you need to pass a diplomacy skill check that persuades /goads her to take it by talking about her duty to the RDC. It *is * possible to make her just take it without handling the stalker.

I disagree. POE1 had one of the best main quests in recent memory.I don't think they're criticizing the main story itself, just the style of the mechanics that presents it. Unless that's what you meant? Also Grimo, I actually really like the direction they took too (at least in concept).I think the issue is more the execution. Doing quests out of a certain order can make things not less or no sense, or miss out on something, because the game doesn't expect you to do it the way you did it, and the rest of the world feels weirdly detached from what's going on with Eothas for a lot of the game. *that said *, the Eothas issue is a really common issue with a lot of games. And Deadfire does integrate it *some. * I liked the main quest too! What I meant was the structure - Act 1 with its very limited scope, which ballooned out in 2, then petered out in 3. What I'm saying is, I like this self-guided adventure structure punctuated by main plot a lot more. I definitely take your point about doing quests out of order (looking at you Berkana's Observatory) but at least they prevented that in the crit path by gating some of the faction quests behind chapters. Yeah! Very much agree on both points.

How so? I never went pro Woedica, but I thought she was always the queen *that was. *

Obsidian won't likely have post ending dlc, so Kaine is right. But you can just save before Ondra's Mortar and reload that when the DLC is out. The point of no return has an hour or two of content after, so you won't lose a ton of progress.

The first rule of the club is you can't use any of those spells.